It may be wishful thinking, but I can’t help but notice the number of relatively high-profile Republicans abandoning Bush the past couple of weeks. Whether it’s part of a larger trend or just isolated coincidences remains to be seen, but it’s encouraging either way.
Two weeks ago is was Russell Train, a life-long Republican and Nixon’s EPA director, announcing that Bush has been a disaster for the environment and throwing his support behind Kerry. A few days prior, it was Ambassador John Eisenhower, who announced he was not only backing Kerry, but also that he’s leaving the GOP altogether because of Bush.
Since then, the hits have kept on coming…
* Former Michigan Gov. William Milliken, life-long Republican:
Former Republican Gov. William Milliken of Michigan endorsed Democratic Sen. John Kerry for president on Monday, saying President Bush has pursued policies “pandering to the extreme right wing.”
Milliken, governor from 1969-82, accused the Bush administration of rushing into the Iraq war, pushing tax cuts that benefit the rich and blocking meaningful stem-cell research.
“I felt so strongly about the direction of this country that in the end, it wasn’t a difficult decision to make,” Milliken said in an interview Monday with Traverse City Record-Eagle reporters and editors.
* Clyde Prestowitz, Reagan administration Commerce Department official:
As a former Reagan-administration official, registered Republican, born-again Christian, and traditional conservative, I am going to vote for John Kerry. So are many other old-line Republicans. Here’s why.
\While the Bush administration calls itself “conservative,” its use of the term is frankly Orwellian. It not only deprives the word of meaning, but also presents the administration’s philosophy as the opposite of what it actually is.
Conservatives have always believed in fiscal responsibility: in being sure you could pay your way and in providing for the future. Conservatives pay down debt, rather than adding to it. This doesn’t necessarily mean balancing the budget every year, but at a minimum it means striving toward balance as a top priority. The Bush approach is completely at odds with such thinking.
* Former Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.), life-long Republican and former Clinton impeachment manager:
For the first time in my voting life, the choice in the race for president isn’t so clear And, among true conservatives, I’m not alone…. [T]he concerns for many conservative voters — concerns that may cause them not to vote for Mr. Bush on Nov. 2 — fall generally into three categories: fiscal, physical (as in the physical security of our nation) and freedom (as in protecting our civil liberties).
* Robert A. George, New York Post writer, life-long Republican, and former aide to Newt Gingrich:
…Bush’s first term has represented a betrayal of conservative values.
It’s not simply a matter of outrageous spending or enlarged government programs — both offenses of which this administration is guilty, as manifested in a 25 percent domestic discretionary spending hike, a half-trillion-dollar Medicare expansion, and the ripping away of free-market agricultural reforms enacted over the past decade. The president continues to pursue tax cuts, as any conservative president would. But a government that cuts taxes and continues to spend ultimately becomes as amoral as one that raises taxes and spends.
Yet the Bush administration’s free-spending fiscal record only hints at its larger rejection of conservative principles. The more fundamental betrayal arises from the administration’s central focus: an ill-defined “war on terror” that has no determinable endpoint and that is used to justify an unprecedented expansion of executive power. To make matters worse, this administration shows little inclination to demand accountability from those who serve within it. In turn, the Republican Congress–ignoring its 1994 vow to “restore the bonds of trust between the people and their elected representatives” — appears disinclined to check the powers of the executive. Together, these factors endanger the long-term health of the republic.
Being a Republican does not mean being a Bush supporter. As crazy as this sounds, recognizing the necessity for a new president need not be a partisan issue this year.